[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Bug-gnubg] Gnubg's ratings and checker versus cube errors.

From: Misja Alma
Subject: RE: [Bug-gnubg] Gnubg's ratings and checker versus cube errors.
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 17:55:21 +0100

I don't understand why there should be different ratings for cube and checker play errors? Is it perhaps not a good idea to base the rating on lost game/ match winning chances regardless if it was a cube error or a checker play error?
You mentioned your money play series between GNU and SW. I'm curious how you calculated the errors that both programs made; I mean, which program has done the rollouts?
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: address@hidden [mailto:address@hiddenNamens address@hidden
Verzonden: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 3:12 PM
Aan: address@hidden
Onderwerp: [Bug-gnubg] Gnubg's ratings and checker versus cube errors.

There's always been a lot of discussion about how to assign ratings based on
checker and cube errors and particularly their ratio.
Some have commented that Gnubg is too harsh with it's ratings for cube errors.

Based on my GNU v SW money play series both Gnubg and S4 have a ratio in EMG where cube errors are ~35% the size of checker play errors.
(I took the liberty of removing a S4 beaver blunder in a highly unusual position to get this number).

Is there a way to use this as some kind of benchmark and incoprporate this into Gnubg's rating assignment?

Obviously there's Matchplay to consider as well.

I just wanted to start off a discussion.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]